Senegal’s US$12 Airport Security Levy Began With a Little-Known 2011 Decree
A security levy introduced by Senegal in 2011 placed a US$12 charge on eligible international air passengers to finance an integrated immigration and biometric screening system. Questions about how the decree was adopted and how the revenue would be used…
Editorial note: This archive item reproduces or summarizes third-party material supplied to the newsroom. Allegations remain attributed to the speakers or outlets identified and should not be read as independent judicial findings by this publication.
A security levy introduced by Senegal in 2011 placed a US$12 charge on eligible international air passengers to finance an integrated immigration and biometric screening system. Questions about how the decree was adopted and how the revenue would be used surfaced almost immediately.
Decree No. 2011-652, dated 26 May 2011, provided the basis for the charge. An account published on 16 September 2011 said the amount was built into airline tickets and collected through carriers, which were then required to pass the proceeds to the contracted operator, Securiport.
Contemporary reporting projected that 1.7 million passengers using Dakar's airport in a year could produce more than US$20 million in annual collections at that rate. That was a projection based on passenger traffic, not an audited statement of actual receipts.
The early controversy was therefore about disclosure as much as price. Passengers could see an additional charge on their tickets, but the public needed to understand how system costs had been calculated, what proportion funded operations and whether any balance accrued to the state.
Later financial and procurement reviews revived those questions. In 2015, local reporting described inspectorate concerns about the Securiport agreement, and the operator later said certain import and tax arrangements had been addressed in a settlement protocol.
The 2011 decree and the reports surrounding it are historical records. They establish the origins of the fee debate, but do not by themselves establish what the operator earned in every later year.